Skip to content Skip to sidebar Skip to footer

Significant cases published January 2022

Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia – (Division 1) Appellate Jurisdiction

Basford & Basford [2021] FedCFamC1A 105 (6 December 2021)

FAMILY LAW – APPEAL – PARENTING – Adequate reasons – Where risk was in issue – Where the respondent alleged that the appellant presented a risk of harm to the children – Where the primary judge failed to consider evidence concerning the appellant’s state of mental health from the appellant’s treating psychologist and general practitioner – Appeal allowed – costs certificates granted.


Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia – (Division 1)

Veselov & Galdin [2021] FedCFamC1F 190 (5 November 2021)

FAMILY LAW – PARENTING – REVIEW OF REGISTRAR’S DECISION – Where proceedings listed for final hearing in May 2022 – Judicial determination of number of nights the child is to spend with the father on a one-off basis – Where the mother proposes four nights and the father proposes five nights – No meaningful difference between the two proposals – Mother alleges child returns dysregulated and anxious from time with the father – Father argues child is happy and secure – Court unable to make material findings of fact in interim proceedings – Where father seeks additional night each fortnight – Where child is set to commence primary school next year – Change in the child’s routine with commencement of school a factor against additional night during term on interim basis before final hearing – Partial consent orders made.


Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia – (Division 2) Family Law

Yarrow & Yarrow [2021] FedCFamC2F 651 (24 December 2021)

FAMILY LAW – Parenting – where the presumption of equal shared parental responsibility does not apply due to family violence – sole parental responsibility for educational matters – otherwise equal shared parental responsibility is in the children’s best interests.

FAMILY LAW – Parenting – with whom children live – where mother seeks to relocate to the Country D with the children – where father opposes relocation and seeks that children live in Australia – where parties previously resided in the Country D and the children were born in there – conflicting positions by mother about relocating to the Country D if children not permitted to do so – finding that relocation is in not the children’s best interests – relocation not permitted –children to live with the father and spend time with the mother in the event that the mother relocates to the Country D.

FAMILY LAW – Property – 13 year relationship – one pool approach – where parties hold real property and superannuation and non-superannuation interests in Australia and the Country D – orders made adjusting the parties’ assets – a just and equitable adjustment requires distribution of 54% in favour of father and 46% in favour of mother if mother relocates or 57% in favour of the mother and 43% in favour of the father, if the mother does not relocate – orders accordingly.